50% hit rate for the Kepler optical planet detections?

NASA's Kepler Mission, which employs transit photometry to discover new worlds, has been the single largest contributor to the overall census of known planets. The spacecraft's CCD detectors are sensitive enough that it is feasible to detect some short-period planets through the variation in their intrinsic emission and reflected starlight during the course of their orbits. A search for these traces of planetary flux was part of the early renditions of the Kepler analysis pipeline, and was called the Reflected Light Search, or RLS module. Budget constraints, however, forced cancellation of the reflected light search as the mission moved toward launch.

In a new paper lead-authored by Millholland, machine-learning techniques are applied to identify non-transiting hot Jupiter-type planets in the archival Kepler data. The pipeline described in the new study has identified sixty high-quality giant planet candidates, all of which are now in need of confirmation via the Doppler velocity technique.

The feasibility of obtaining definitive radial velocity observations for the candidates is quite high. Although many of the target stars are faint, the planets, should they exist, are expected to have large radial velocity semi-amplitudes. The confirmation of a significant number of the candidate planets would provide a highly useful ensemble for studies of how planetary atmospheres and climates react to extreme conditions of stellar insolation.

In cases where prospective host stars receive five or more Doppler velocity observations of mean estimated instrumental velocity precision of 15 m/s or better, will 50% or more of the candidates listed in Table 4 of the paper turn out to be bona-fide hot Jupiters?

For purposes of question resolution, a successful detection must be published in the peer-reviewed literature prior to July 1, 2018, and must be consistent with a planet having 0.2 Mjup < Msin(i) < 13 Mjup, and a period within 10% of the value listed in Table 4 of the paper.

{{qctrl.predictionString()}}

Metaculus help: Predicting

Predictions are the heart of Metaculus. Predicting is how you contribute to the wisdom of the crowd, and how you earn points and build up your personal Metaculus track record.

The basics of predicting are very simple: move the slider to best match the likelihood of the outcome, and click predict. You can predict as often as you want, and you're encouraged to change your mind when new information becomes available.

The displayed score is split into current points and total points. Current points show how much your prediction is worth now, whereas total points show the combined worth of all of your predictions over the lifetime of the question. The scoring details are available on the FAQ.

Note: this question resolved before its original close time. All of your predictions came after the resolution, so you did not gain (or lose) any points for it.

Note: this question resolved before its original close time. You earned points up until the question resolution, but not afterwards.

Track your predictions

Continue exploring the site

Community Stats

Metaculus help: Community Stats

Use the community stats to get a better sense of the community consensus (or lack thereof) for this question. Sometimes people have wildly different ideas about the likely outcomes, and sometimes people are in close agreement. There are even times when the community seems very certain of uncertainty, like when everyone agrees that event is only 50% likely to happen.

When you make a prediction, check the community stats to see where you land. If your prediction is an outlier, might there be something you're overlooking that others have seen? Or do you have special insight that others are lacking? Either way, it might be a good idea to join the discussion in the comments.

Embed this question

You can use the below code snippet to embed this question on your own webpage. Feel free to change the height and width to suit your needs.